When I was in college I learned that parts of the ancient city of Pompeii had been deliberately avoided by archaeologists during digs. My professor explained that in the modern age we understand the limitations of archaeology to the point where some areas of the city have been purposely allowed to remain buried in the hope that future technologies would allow us to explore these areas without destroying them.
One of the great problems with archaeology throughout history is that the act of uncovering something like the city of Pompeii is that the very process which allows us to glean information also begins the process of degrading the artifacts we wish to learn from. Much has been written about the current state of Pompeii to the point UNESCO has even warned that the ancient site risks falling apart. Herein lies the dilemma of modern conservation, we must refuse to discover in the hopes that in the future we can discover.
Perhaps the best illustrations of the worthwhile nature of conservation was the recent announcement that a group of scrolls charred by the eruption of Vesuvius could be read through the use of a new X-Ray technique. Had those archaeologists who came before us attempted to remove, or read these scrolls in prior years they may have been lost to time, however through modern technology they are now yielding their (hopefully) valuable information. We as historians need to temper our desire for new discoveries with our understanding of our limitations.
The bottom line is this – conservation may be just as valuable to our future as the small amount of information we can glean from our modern processes. If we as historians want to leave our legacy perhaps the best way is to choose NOT to pursue discovery when conservation may prove to yield more information in the future.
Faas Historical Research 